Recent Publications by H. Blochová and P. Mařík about Theodoric


We are dealing with the above studies all together due to the fact that they were published at the same time, are devoted to the same theme and their results are equally problematical. Both authors take the same view, albeit at different levels, i.e. purely scientific. The value of their information lies, therefore, mainly on the factographic side, in the listing of ascertained details which form a kind of anatomy of the work of Theodoric. Many of these details have already been published and are now being verified by other and different methods. In their conclusions, however, both authors have failed to avoid certain errors which stem from the uncritical adoption of hypotheses not their own and also the overestimation of the value of scientific methods for the evaluation of a work of art. One such unconvincing adopted hypothesis of H.Blochová is the influence of contemporary Italian technique on Theodoric's painting, documented by various quotations from Cennini. As has already been explained elsewhere by the author of this review, Italian painting of the 14th century is materially and technically different and the common traits are the common property of European culture. A further adopted hypothesis is the division of the raised decoration of the Chapel into two phases, the first of which uses gilded tin foil and a thick gold foil, the second relief stamped and cast decoration, applied to the background after the removal of the decoration of the first phase. Investigations so far, however, concern only one third of all the panels. At the same time only about half the panel paintings in the Chapel show signs of the cutting away of the chalk background along the outline of the figures. As has been proved convincingly by Mojmír Frinta, the author of the raised decorations and the author of the painting were not, in many cases, one and the same.

Similar specialisation probably also occurred in Karlštejn. An important part in the various changes which clearly occurred in the Castle was also played by Charles IV himself. It is probable, and most research workers now agree on this point, that in the Chapel of the Holy Rood also there occurred development of raised decoration and certain changes in the course of the actual decoration of the Chapel and this gave rise to daring hypotheses.

At the same time no uniform procedure was observed – nor could it be in the course of so extensive a work. It seems, however, that the basic concept of the imitation of goldsmith's work with raised decoration, which proceeds right through the wall and panel painting, existed right from the start, as is shown by the decoration of the Church of the Virgin Mary and St Catherine's Chapel. The similarity of the material of the pastiglias of the wall paintings, architectural elements and the panel paintings is striking and estimates of any kind of temporal caesuras between them are purely hypothetical. The occurrence of tin foil on the reliefs remained a misunderstood detail. According to comparative material from other countries tin really was used only as an insulation layer in casting and not to facilitate the technique of gilding. Analogies of the occurrence of raised decoration in various parts of Europe do not provide safe ground for stylistic kinship because they span centuries. In this direction the author of the study (Ms. Blochová) goes too far.

To sum up, one cannot evaluate the two studies mentioned otherwise than as a collection of findings of a partial nature with certain new observations, the interpretation of which and the correctness of the conclusions emerging from them can be judged definitively only after the completion of all investigative work in the Chapel of the Holy Rood.